Allowed

Chandu and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2018BAIL/7762/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the court granted bail to Chandu and Lokesh in a murder trial. Noting that no role was assigned to Lokesh and the fire alleged against Chandu did not hit the victim, and considering their lack of criminal history, the court found it a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicants Chandu and Lokesh on personal bond and two sureties each subject to strict conditions.

Chandu and Another Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 17

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7762 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Chandu And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Mishra,Sati Shanker Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

¶5

This Bail Application (under Section 439 Cr.P.C.) has been moved for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 510 of 2014 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307 and 120B I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Mathura.

¶6

As per F.I.R., the prosecution case is that on 15.06.2014 at about 9.15 a.m., accused persons Lokesh, Chandu, Vikas and Arjun entered the house of the first informant, Vijay Pal and Vikas fired upon his wife, Laxmi Devi with an intention to kill by revolver in his hand and the other fire was made by Chandu which did not hit his son Devendra. The wife of the first informant died on the spot. This occurrence took place because the son of the first informant, Abhishek had enticed away the daughter of the deceased Kmr. Archana.

¶7

It has been argued on behalf of the learned counsel for the accused applicants that accused applicants have been falsely implicated in this case; final report was submitted against the present accused along with co-accused who were named in F.I.R. and the charge-sheet was submitted only against Raju @ Rajendra. Thereafter, when trial started, the present accused along with three others have been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial; it is further contended that even in F.I.R., role of Chandu is of firing upon son of the first informant, Devendra which did not hit him; Lokesh has also not been assigned any role in F.I.R.; both the accused have no criminal history; the accused applicants are in jail since 1.02.2018; if the accused are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail however has not controverted the aforesaid facts.

¶9

In view of the above arguments and looking to the fact that no role is assigned to accused Lokesh while the fire alleged to have been made by Chandu did not hit Devendra, quantum of the punishment, nature of the offence and period of detention in jail, without

¶10

expressing any opinion on the merits, this case is found to be a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Chandu And Lokesh involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶17

Order Date :- 5.3.2018 A. Mandhani

Chandu and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandu and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Netrapal Singh alias Nepal Singh and 5 others Vs State of U.P. and another

Amarpal and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Chhotey @ Shivshanker Vs State of U.P.

Saleem Vs State of U.P.

Sangeeta Alias Reeta Vs State of U.P.

Kalyan Vs State of U.P.